Can Geographical Distance influenced the Differences in Birds Features ?

We may all appear different from the outside but deep inside i believe we are all the same - ever compassionate and merciful. In the avian world, geographical distance may have some effect on some birds plumage thus creating more subspecies. This can only be determined / confirmed if the subtle differences occur over a period of time. Recently i came across some birds from different states which show some differences in their outlook despite been from the same species.

I start with Mr Abbott's Babbler (M. abbotti):

The photo below of an Abbott's Babbler was taken in Kedah. Its flank appear more buffy while the orbital ring around its eyes were less prominent as compared with the one i saw in Penang mainland.

Below are those from Penang mainland

Despite the above differences, i would also not discount that they could be from different gender or age group. More observations are required.

Next is the Mangrove Flycatcher (C. rufigastra):

The photo below depicts a Mangrove Flycatcher taken at Penang mainland.

and this one below was taken in Kedah recently

Again although both the above flycatchers were male but the differences (color of its legs, throat and forehead) could be due to age variation or the different timing of moulting (of their feathers).

Here is the very common "White-throated Kingfisher" (H. smyrnensis):

The above photo was taken in KL. It looks like your typical white-throated kingfisher.

This one below was taken in Perlis. It appears darker and with a brighter turquoise above and on wing coverts.

Could it be from a different Ssp?

Science and birds are inextricable just like a lady and her lipstick but when you use Science against humanity its no longer a science !

Paddyfield Pipit (Anthus rufulus)

It is probably one of those avians which are often overlook or understudy due to their plain plumage and common presence. You can find them in open countries, farmlands, soccer fields, coastal plains and dry country roads (my personal observation) although i have also seen them at the foot of a mountain in Ulu Langat. Despite been called a paddyfield pipit, it is usually found along the dirt roads surrounding the paddyfields and not in the ricefields itself like those snipes and bitterns would do.

Some places have also named them as oriental pipit probably due to its occurrence in mainly Asia countries but it was reported to be a non-breeding resident bird here in Malaysia. (Birdlife International, 2016). Recently in May 2019, i came across a number of Paddyfield Pipits at a vast marshland in Penang mainland which reminds me of a similar looking site at Chuping. Here are some photos of what should be Paddyfield Pipits at this location although migratory pipits such as Richard's Pipit (A. richardi) and Blyth's Pipit (A. godlewskii) have been seen and reported in Malaysia. 

Paddyfield Pipit (Anthus rufulus)

Posed like a Richard's Pipit, looks like one but it ain't one.

I believe the above pipit is an adult bird which has just molted it feathers hence showing very clear and fine markings or perhaps it could be due to its breeding colors.

Currently there are 6 recognised subspecies and the ones found here are thought to be A.r malayensis which is reported to be darker and heavily streaked while the nominate race is much creamy and has a more buffy supercilium (HBW Alive).

The one above appears more like a Paddyfield Pipit - long legs, upright stand, more rufescent and short tail.

The bird above looks a bit duller.

Not sure whether all the birds shown here are the same but all these photos were taken at different locations covering a very large area.

These birds are rarely seen high up in the canopy. At most they perched at eye level.

Some of them do hide inside the long grasses if threats are perceived.

While some do not mind to be out in the open.

Life can be tough and lonely if the entire institution machineries are used against you but the above Paddyfield Pipit with an abnormal leg has shown the tenacity and strong will to survive this far.


Here are some photos of a juvenile Paddyfield Pipit with a grasshopper prey

HAVE SOME FUN WHILE YOU CAN !

Domestic Chicken versus Red Junglefowl : How do We Differentiate them?

Chickens have co-existed with human beings since the early age of human civilisation. From archaeological findings in Neolithic sites, it was hypothesized that domestic chickens in South East Asia were originated from junglefowls (Hiromi sawai et al, 2010). We (the nutty birders) are very well informed that Red Junglefowl (Gallus gallus) is the wild replica of Gallus gallus domestica but how do we differentiate them when we see one in nature especially when there are also free-ranging ferals and free-ranging village chickens in the mix. In local terms how do we know whether it was an Ayam Kampung or an Ayam Hutan ?

Since the early 20th century thru the writings of Beebe (1918 to 1921) until todate, many literature have written on Gallus gallus. Topics ranging from embryonic development, social and sexual behaviors, vocalisation, habitat preference, roosting behavior to genetic variation have all been covered extensively. Unfortunately many literature until today still can't seem to agree on the actual traits of a Gallus gallus. Before you start pulling your hair or depleting your gray matter further, have a look here at what current researchers have to say on the characteristics of its conspecific domesticated descendants.

Thru the various phenotypic characters identified as signals of genetically "pure" Red Junglefowl (Gallus gallus) genomes, Brisbin & Peterson, 2007 identified a few phenotypic markers of a seemingly pure Gallus gallus. Here are the field markers mentioned:

i) the presence of red or yellow neck hackles are replaced with spatulate black feathers on an eclipse male plumage.

ii) slender, darker legs

iii) horizontal body posture 

iv) simpler and shorter calls.

The above description was also concurred by Steven Platt et al (2009) whereby an eclipse male Red Junglefowl free from domesticated influence has been described as typically having black hackles in mid-back which are not elongated in contrast to the elongated red-orange plumes of the main plumage.

From the above description and the many photos of Gallus gallus reviewed, i believed that the photos below here belongs to a Gallus gallus or locally called Ayam Hutan.

All the above photos were taken from a mangrove area (at a river estuary) near a town called Merbok, in the state of Kedah, February 2019. There were actually 3 of them and all were males. The above photos only showed two of them. The third one was hiding further away at a distance. Despite moving further away from them, they did not alight from their mangrove perch and despite that it was also near some human settlements where food should be abundant. Duration of observation was around 15 minutes.

Although all the above photos showed most of the features of a Gallus gallus in general sense but until a DNA test is done, i cannot conclude that they were all free of any domestic genes.

According to Hoa Nguyen- Phuc and Mark E. Berres (2018), wild junglefowls (adult males, females, juveniles) that hatched by domestic chickens usually do not tolerate captivity. Brisbin and Peterson (2007) have earlier explained that hybrid offspring would be expected to move far away from human settlements into the forest. Its only after 3 or 4 generations of cross breeding will the offsprings eventually tolerate a continued human presence. This findings were also supported by Rebecca Kavajamaa et al, (2018) whereby it was reported that there were some correlated effect of tameness on young Red Junglefowl when been raised by human beings.

It is also pertinent to note that Hoa Nguyen- Phuc and Mark E. Berres (2018) research also found no strong correlation between geographic distances and genetic dissimilarities among their samples collected. By using a Bayesian clustering method to establish the distribution between samples, Hoa Nguyen- Phuc and Mark E. Berres (2018) finding means that Gallus gallus found in Thailand, Vietnam, India or Indonesia for example should have the same genetic code. Meanwhile according to HBW Alive, currently there are 5 subspecies been recognised and those in Malaysia are reckoned from the Ssp G.g spadiceus.

Most researchers nevertheless agreed that hybridisation and introgression are phenomena that can threaten the genetic integrity of many wildlife.

"Genetic contamination of wild populations via hybridisation (natural or human induced) with domesticated stocks represents a serious but underappreciated concern in the conservation of biodiversity" (Brisbin, 1995; Rhymer & Simberloff, 1996 in Brisbin and Peterson, 2007)

For comparison purposes, here are photos of what i believe were some hybrid Gallus gallus:

The above photo was taken at a forest edge in Selangor in 2018.

The above photo was taken at a forest edge in Pahang in 2018

CONCLUSION

From the above photos and references adduced, all i can say here is that

"All Gallus gallus are chickens but not all chickens are Gallus gallus"

References

Brisbin and Peterson, 2007. Playing Chicken with Red Junglefowl: Identifying Phenotypic Markers of Genetic Purity in Gallus gallus. In Animal Conservation. 10 (4): 429 - 435, Nov 2007.

Hiromi Sawai et al, 2010. The Origin and Genetic Variation of Domestic Chickens with Special Reference to Junglefowl G.Gallus gallus and G. varius.  In Plosone, 2010, 5 (5),

Hoa Ngyuyen - Phuc and Mark E. Berres, 2018. Genetic Structure in Red Junglefowl (Gallus gallus) Populations: Strong spatial patterns in the wild ancestors of domestic chickens in a core distribution range. In Ecology and Evolution, 2018, July, 8 (13): 6575 - 6588.

Rebecca Katajamaa, Lovisa H. Larson, Paulina Lundberg, Ida Sorensen, Per Jensen, 2018. Activity, Social and Sexual Behavior in Red Junglefowl selected for divergent levels of fear of humans. In journal.plos.org. September, 2018.

Steven G. Platt, Tomas P. Condon, Johny S. Tasirin, Iwan Hunowu, Stephan Siwu, Richard A. Jones and Thomas R. Rainwater, 2009. Notes on red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) in Northern Sulawesi, Indonesia, with an emphasis on genetic introgression with domestic chickens. In Malayan Nature Journal 2009, (61(1), 23 - 33.